THE DOG AS THE SUBJECT OF LARCENY. 61 



a "domestic animal" — a decision that to the lay mind must 

 seem curious.®" 



Where the statute defined larceny as the "felonious taking 

 the personal property of another" and defined "personal prop- 

 erty" as "goods, chattels, effects, etc.," the court said, in a 

 case where the defendant was indicted for stealing a dog, 

 "There is no term broader than chattel. Bouvier in his Law 

 Dictionary says a 'chattel is a term including all kinds of prop- 

 erty except the freehold and things which are parcel of it.' 

 If these statutes, therefore, do not clearly abrogate the com- 

 mon law rule, they raise so grave a question as to render it 

 improper for me on habeas corpus to discharge the pris- 

 oner." 81 



So where a statute conferred power upon a magistrate to 

 order the delivery of goods unlawfully detained to their 

 owner, it was held that the term "goods" included a dog, the 

 court saying: "Surely under a bequest of 'all my worldly 

 goods' a dog would pass to the legatee." "^ 



But where a statute imposed a penalty on the larceny of 

 "goods or chattels" and, in another section, on that of bonds, 

 bills, etc., it was held that a dog was not included in the term 

 "goods and chattels." "There is no reason for supposing 

 that it was intended by this act to extend the crime of larceny 

 beyond its ancient limits. That would be a singular con- 

 struction of a law, the object of which was to mitigcite the 

 penal code. By the words any goods or chattels we are to un- 

 derstand any such goods or chattels as have been esteemed 

 subjects of larceny. . . . Bonds, bills, etc., are goods or chat- 

 tels; and yet it was thought necessary to declare them sub- 

 jects of felony by a special provision; which shows that the 

 words goods or chattels before mentioned were to be taken, not 



"• State V. Harriman, 75 Me. 562. 



" Peo. V. Maloney, i Park Cr. (N. Y.) 593. And in Iowa and South 

 Carolina a dog is the subject of larceny as a "chattel :" Hamby v. Samson, 

 105 la. 112; State v. Langford (S. C), 33 S. E. Rep. 370. 



" Reg. V. Slade, 21 Q. B. D. 433. 



